AN APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL (PROPERTY CHAMBER)
Ref: REC/2022/0022
B e f o r e :
____________________
MS SIAMA KHURSHID |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
PHILOMENA SAM-YORKE |
Respondent |
|
39 Gordon Place, Reading, Berkshire, RG30 1LA |
____________________
Ms Gabriella Sam-Yorke for the respondent
9 June 2025
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
LAND REGISTRATION - RECTIFICATION OR SETTING ASIDE OF DOCUMENTS transfer of land unintended transfer of an additional parcel of land conveyancer's error "outward expression of accord" in the form of parties' communication through estate agents supporting evidence exclusion of relevant evidence
The following cases were referred to in this decision:
Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2009] UKHL 38
FSHC Group Holdings Ltd v GLAS Trust Corporation Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 1361
Misys v Misys Retirement Benefit Trustees Ltd [2012] EWHC 4250
Ralph v Ralph [2021] EWCA Civ 1106
Introduction
The issue in the appeal
[Diagram or picture not reproduced in HTML version - see original .rtf file to view diagram or picture]/
[Diagram or picture not reproduced in HTML version - see original .rtf file to view diagram or picture]/
The law relating to the rectification of documents
The facts
The proceedings in the FTT and the FTT's decision
"As the Respondent will not have the opportunity to respond to the further witness statement by reason of the debarring order it is not in the interests of the overriding objective to admit the late statement."
The FTT's decision
"We were completely unaware of any land remote from the subject properties and in particular 39 Gordon Place which indicated this land which we now understand to be off Thornton Road would be included Our records show you agreed a sale subject to contract on 19 November 2019 to Ms Philomena Sam-Yorke following an arranged and accompanied viewing for the aforementioned part a 9:30 on 17th November 2018. As we were not availed of knowing of this remote piece of land in Thornton Road until now we couldn't possibly commit to selling something we were not aware of at the time."
a. There was no evidence as to what the subjective intentions of the parties were;
b. That Mr Saood did not give a witness statement as to his intention;
c. That there was no contemporaneous evidence demonstrating what the appellant's or Mr Saood's instructions were; that Mr Saood's instructions to the solicitor were "not disclosed or referred to" in his solicitor's witness statement; that Mr Saood's intention was not referred to in his solicitor's witness statement; and
d. The correspondence "all refers to selling the whole of Title No BK402889".
The appeal
Ground 1: no need for an outward expression of accord
Grounds 2 and 3: the outward expression of accord
Ground 4: case management decisions about the evidence
Conclusion
Upper Tribunal Judge Elizabeth Cooke
12 June 2025
Right of appeal
Any party has a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal on any point of law arising from this decision. The right of appeal may be exercised only with permission. An application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal must be sent or delivered to the Tribunal so that it is received within 1 month after the date on which this decision is sent to the parties (unless an application for costs is made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties, in which case an application for permission to appeal must be made within 1 month of the date on which the Tribunal's decision on costs is sent to the parties). An application for permission to appeal must identify the decision of the Tribunal to which it relates, identify the alleged error or errors of law in the decision, and state the result the party making the application is seeking. If the Tribunal refuses permission to appeal a further application may then be made to the Court of Appeal for permission.